Sunday, 27 December 2015

With every passing month, Jeremy Corbyn’s position at the
top of the Labour Party is becoming further entrenched. His minders promise a
purge of dissenters early in 2016 and they propose ‘consultations’ on policy
which will not just be restricted to long-standing members, but will also involve
anyone who has paid a few quid and signed up on a whim to support Corbyn’s
far-left platform.

Many of these newbies follow their leader with a religious
fervour and are impervious to rational argument. They openly dismiss the
concrete polling evidence that shows JC’s elevation to be an unmitigated
disaster. I even had a discussion with one fan recently in which he seriously
argued I should ignore the polls and look instead at how quickly Corbyn
merchandise was selling online.

There are many Labour moderates who caution against
precipitous action. Why mount a coup d’état which is more than likely to fail? Wouldn’t it be better to bide our time and let
the Corbynistas see the error of their ways? Perhaps we should wait until defeat
in 2020? At that stage, it will be obvious to everybody what a tragic mistake
was made in the autumn of 2015.

It’s a beguiling argument, but one that is riddled with
holes.

First of all, untold damage will be done to the Labour
Party’s reputation over the next few years if Corbyn remains in charge. We have
the forthcoming referendum on membership of the EU, the ongoing debate about
how best to take the fight to IS and the whole climate of retrenchment and cuts
in the public sector under Cameron and Osborne. Labour needs to have something
serious to say on these issues and a leader credible enough to deliver the
message.

Second, the defeat when it comes in 2020 will be of
catastrophic proportions. I feel its extent is underestimated today, even by
those who have no time for Corbyn and his sidekick John McDonnell. Looking at the current polling data (which is
probably artificially boosting Labour numbers), I think it quite likely that
the party will fall below the 25% barrier. If that happens, the prospects will
already be fairly bleak for 2025, regardless of who takes over the leadership.

Third, the narrative from the Corbyn left will be one of betrayal. Labour’s failure will not have anything to do
with their beloved guru, but will have been the result of the fiendish attacks
of the capitalist press and the treacherous behaviour of ‘red Tories’ within
the party. Our Jez was never given a
proper chance, they will bleat disingenuously.

So we can play the waiting game and find that we have enveloped
ourselves in blanket of delusion. Every month that Corbyn remains unchallenged
is a month in which he remodels the party to support his own interests and
consolidate his power base. The danger is that we look back on the early months
of 2016 and realise we missed a vital opportunity. Perhaps our only
opportunity.

One interesting option might be for the PLP to elect its own
leader, signalling its independence from the grip of the party machine. The Corbynistas would shriek in outrage, but
would have few levers to pull. Although they may still command a majority among
the members and pseudo-members, the reality is that the frontline political
message of the Labour Party is carried to the media and the public by parliamentarians.

An alternative is a strategy of non-cooperation with the
leadership. This means a mass resignation of all moderate forces in the current
shadow cabinet and from junior shadow ministerial appointments. While Corbyn might well be able to pick off individuals
such as Angela Eagle and Hilary Benn, he would be seriously challenged to find
credible people to fill a whole load of empty seats.

A likely criticism of these suggestions is they lack a real
game plan. What is supposed to happen as a result of any action taken by the
PLP? Is Corbyn meant to cave in and
call it a day? It seems highly unlikely. And even if he did, would he not simply put
himself up for re-election again? While
some members will no doubt regret their decision to back him in the summer, the
likelihood is that he could once again carry a majority.

I don’t disagree with any of this. If it did come to another
leadership election, there would need to be a strong, impressive candidate to
take Corbyn on. Someone who attacked his extremist policy positions from the
outset and who had the credibility the erstwhile contenders lacked. A figure such as Alan
Johnson perhaps. Or Tom Watson, the man who managed to achieve his own mandate
as the party’s deputy leader. But I
fully accept that this seems a little pie in the sky.

Ultimately, the challenge must happen anyway, regardless of the prospects of success. Why? Because Labour is a
party with a proud history, dating from the very start of the twentieth
century. It was created to represent the interests of ordinary working people
who wanted a better life, not the ideological agenda of activists. Never has
the disconnect between the membership and ordinary Labour voters been so
catastrophically large. So our fight is
for the people who rely on the Labour
Party rather than the people who comprise its membership.

If the confrontation with Corbyn fails, we walk away. There
is a new party and a fresh start. But at least the process of recovery and
renaissance can begin. Delay may prove deadly.